Feel free to use this as a repository for terrible things you've seen on youtube that you want to discuss(though I have qualms about being the thread starter for such a unhappy and negative experience).
Someone in Asia has figured out a way to deep fry a fish so that it remains alive, through the cooking process...and while you eat it. I couldn't even finish watching the video.
I think more than the disgust at what was being done, was the excitement of the people watching this fish trying to breathe and taking so much general pleasure in this experience. I wonder if they would have the same enjoyment if they had a live chicken or pig laying on their plate moving around as they bit chunks of it off.
On the other hand, maybe if they made all meat eaters watch their food die slowly as they ate them we'd have less meat eaters! So there's that...
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*shudder* Thanks for the warning and not just providing a link. I could only watch 2-second snippets.
I have no problem eating meat. I think torturing an animal while you are eating it is beyond horrific.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Though I'm a vegetarian I have no theoretical problem with eating meat given certain conditions. But like you say, this is just beyond cruel.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Oh, I saw this at EastSouthWestNorth earlier so there's a bit more background on it there. The speakers are Cantonese (tourists, I would guess from the conversation and their unfamiliarity with the dish). http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200911b.brief.htm#014
On the other hand, there is a Taiwanese variant here http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=2789 Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Does the background info explain why the H*LL they're so freaking sadistic?
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
I think there are legitimate questions about how much different life forms are capable of suffering. But the expression on that fishes face looked like it was suffering to me.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I don't care if it really was suffering or not. That was utterly barbarous.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
TomDavidson: Well, the Chinese food critic seems to be accusing the chef of a psychological imbalance.
In the video, the closest Western equivalent would be "I dare you." There are at least two younger males who are splitting it and a pretty horrified younger women who probably won't. There's an older woman who directed the hit and probably introduced the dish to the others.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:On the other hand, maybe if they made all meat eaters watch their food die slowly as they ate them we'd have less meat eaters!
Watching their food slowly die as they slaughtered it didn't seem to put people off from eating meat in the past.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
There was more of a necessity in the past for meat eating. We also had a much healthier relationship with our food in the past.
Do you really think if people had to watch a cow get slaughtered before they were able to eat their McDonald's hamburger that at least some percentage of people wouldn't stop eating meat, or cut down on their meat consumption? It's not just the slaughtering of the animal today, it's the process that leads up to that slaughter as well that I think turns people off the more they find out about it.
Anyway, that was a side comment, I'm not here to convert anyone to vegetarianism.
Our relationship with fish in this culture is interesting. I think it's the only animal that we both keep as pets and eat(not counting those who are raised on farms who might consider some of their livestock as pets).
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Rule 34: This is someone's fetish, with human beings in the starring role. Or so I heard. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I think that there is an enormous difference between recognizing the necessity of slaughtering animals for food and reveling in it.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Strider: Rabbits and snakes would also qualify. Certain insects are borderline as would certain kinds of small bird (as in we eat a species that is reasonably similar to one that we keep as a pet).
As for the question as to whether it would affect meat consumption. I doubt it. Even in North America, we often have wet markets where fish and lobsters have to be killed in front of the customer before being cooked. This is actually a selling feature.
(On the other hand, I guess it could be possible some might be more disturbed by having to see a mammal killed rather than just a vertebrate)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I think that there is an enormous difference between recognizing the necessity of slaughtering animals for food and reveling in it.
Exactly.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Mucus, where do you live again? I don't know that I've heard of anyone eating snakes or rabbits in America. Though that would certainly qualify if it was widespread.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:There was more of a necessity in the past for meat eating. We also had a much healthier relationship with our food in the past.
Do you really think if people had to watch a cow get slaughtered before they were able to eat their McDonald's hamburger that at least some percentage of people wouldn't stop eating meat, or cut down on their meat consumption? It's not just the slaughtering of the animal today, it's the process that leads up to that slaughter as well that I think turns people off the more they find out about it.
For some context, our family raises, slaughters, and butchers all of our own meat.
It hasn't cut down our meat consumption by all that much, but it has changed how we think about it.
I know a lot of people here in the US who eat rabbit. For those wanting to raise their own meat, it's an extremely practical animal, especially for those living in the city.
Also, in rural America you'll find a lot of people with pet goats.
Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Mucus, where do you live again? I don't know that I've heard of anyone eating snakes or rabbits in America. Though that would certainly qualify if it was widespread.
Seriously? You don't know anyone who's had rabbit? Guess you don't know many hunters. Growing up in central PA, many of my friends and their parents who hunted often had rabbit.
Snake, I think is more of a western US thing. My dad had some waaay back when when he was in San Diego.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:There was more of a necessity in the past for meat eating. We also had a much healthier relationship with our food in the past.
Do you really think if people had to watch a cow get slaughtered before they were able to eat their McDonald's hamburger that at least some percentage of people wouldn't stop eating meat, or cut down on their meat consumption? It's not just the slaughtering of the animal today, it's the process that leads up to that slaughter as well that I think turns people off the more they find out about it.
For some context, our family raises, slaughters, and butchers all of our own meat.
It hasn't cut down our meat consumption by all that much, but it has changed how we think about it.
Do you mind if I ask what your meat consumption actually is? Multiple times a day? Every day? A few times a week?
I think if more people did what your family does we'd have a much better relationship with meat in this country. From the treatment of the animals, to the carbon footprint in raising livestock.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by Godric:
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Mucus, where do you live again? I don't know that I've heard of anyone eating snakes or rabbits in America. Though that would certainly qualify if it was widespread.
Seriously? You don't know anyone who's had rabbit? Guess you don't know many hunters. Growing up in central PA, many of my friends and their parents who hunted often had rabbit.
I guess I'm just sheltered.
Here's my question though, are the same people who are hunting and eating rabbits also keeping rabbits as pets? Are people with pet rabbits also eating rabbits on the side. I think what i find interesting about fish in particular is someone will have a fish tank at home, and then go out for a dinner and eat fish.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
I thought this would be a hilarious thread but I was horribly wrong.
[ November 17, 2009, 08:22 PM: Message edited by: Clive Candy ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I finally saw that video. That was the worst thing I've seen in a long time. :shudder:
---
We probably eat meat on average once a day.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Does the background info explain why the H*LL they're so freaking sadistic?
I'm afraid not.
我不管多麽好吃， 吃了那種還活著的動物真惡性了。
I know it's kinda rude to type in a language few will understand but it was the words that came to my mind. I'll translate if anybody really cares.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
No, BlackBlade. You can type in a non-English language on a subject for which there is a lot of interest and I'm sure there won't be any curiosity at all about what you were saying. Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Here's my question though, are the same people who are hunting and eating rabbits also keeping rabbits as pets? Are people with pet rabbits also eating rabbits on the side. I think what i find interesting about fish in particular is someone will have a fish tank at home, and then go out for a dinner and eat fish.
Hmmm... None of them owned rabbits as pets that I recall.
I had pet rabbits for awhile. I've never eaten rabbit, but I would try it given the opportunity.
I've owned lots of pet fish and also eat a lot of fish. I would not eat a fish that was still flapping around and breathing (even if I was starving and had no way to cook it, I think I'd at least kill the thing first).
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP: No, BlackBlade. You can type in a non-English language on a subject for which there is a lot of interest and I'm sure there won't be any curiosity at all about what you were saying.
Oh man you zinged me good. Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
We own pet chickens. I have butchered and eaten one of them. I don't mind butchering, but it's not a very economical way to get meat and I'm not very good at it. I doubt I got more than 2/3 of the usable meat off of the rooster I butchered.
I don't think I'd have any trouble eating dog or cat, provided it actually tasted good.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Godric, I thought about it a bit more and it does seem that most fish owners don't make close connections to their fish but enjoy them more for the aesthetic qualities of having a fish tank. I imagine someone would think differently about eating a dog for dinner if they have a pet dog at home, because at that point it just becomes, "well, it's okay to eat dogs i don't know".
edit - thanks for sneaking in and proving me wrong Matt! Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
My mom's friend raises sheep and she'll eat lamb, as long as she didn't raise the actual animal. But she keeps a few for pets and the rest go to farms or slaughter houses.
My uncle does the same with his rabbits. There are a few his girls were close to growing up but the rest ended up on the dinner table.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:are the same people who are hunting and eating rabbits also keeping rabbits as pets?
I know somebody who raises rabbits to eat but has a couple reserved as pets.
Posted by theCrowsWife (Member # 8302) on :
It seems to me that if you're going to call aquarium fish the same thing as edible fish, then people who keep a cage of finches or canaries and eat chicken would fall under the same category.
Like Porter, we raise most of our own protein. I don't have any difficulty eating meat that I've raised and slaughtered myself. I do agree that many people have been so sheltered from food production that they probably would become vegetarian if they had to do what we do in order to eat meat.
--Mel
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
I may often be suckered into clicking on links that I'm sorry for afterwards, but I'm never watching that video in the OP. Just hearing about it horrifies me.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Back when I was a young, naive missionary in Portugal, my companion and I were invited to the home of a sweet older couple who lived in a fairly rural area for a Sunday dinner.
We enjoyed meeting all their cute animals, including the rabbits. And a couple of hours later had one of the ones we'd been petting and admiring for dinner. We were clueless, it had never occurred to us we were petting our dinner!
Mind you, it was delicious. My companion couldn't really appreciate it but I guess I'm a bit more pragmatic. I still remember the lovely chunks of meat in a yummy brown gravy. What I remember more is the honor I felt that that sweet humble couple gave us something that I'm sure was very valuable to them.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Seriously? You don't know anyone who's had rabbit? Guess you don't know many hunters. Growing up in central PA, many of my friends and their parents who hunted often had rabbit.
I would like to throw in my two cents as a random person who doesn't know anyone who eats rabbit (at least recently).
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I've raised rabbits as pets and have eaten rabbit. In fact, in 4-H, there was always a rabbit sausage stand just outside the small animals barn (where the rabbits were exhibited).
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by theCrowsWife: It seems to me that if you're going to call aquarium fish the same thing as edible fish, then people who keep a cage of finches or canaries and eat chicken would fall under the same category.
Like Porter, we raise most of our own protein. I don't have any difficulty eating meat that I've raised and slaughtered myself. I do agree that many people have been so sheltered from food production that they probably would become vegetarian if they had to do what we do in order to eat meat.
--Mel
You're right, I would put them all in the same category.
I want to make it clear, I'm not judging people for eating meat. My vegetarianism is my own choice and I'm not trying to push that on anyone in this thread and my purpose with the OP was only to discuss what I thought was a really horrible video. While many of my problems with meat eating have to do with the subjective conscious experience of the animal and the harm done to it, many of my problems have much to do with the current system of meat production in this country. I applaud people who bypass to a large extent this system.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
The Queen of Men dislikes eating meat with bones in it, on the grounds that it reminds her that food doesn't originate in supermarket shelves.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
(Following is along the lines of the first video so watch at your own discretion) Freshest fish in the world
This isn't as bad as the first video but I don't get why they keep the fish's head alive. They could just kill it and it wouldn't change the taste at all (at least it wouldn't change the taste of anything besides the head). The thing is, I like raw fish and the fish (besides the head) actually looks very tasty. I would never pay for something like that though unless the fish were actually killed quickly and as painlessly as possible.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:The Queen of Men dislikes eating meat with bones in it, on the grounds that it reminds her that food doesn't originate in supermarket shelves.
For me, that's a reason to dislike meat without bones.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Our relationship with fish in this culture is interesting. I think it's the only animal that we both keep as pets and eat(not counting those who are raised on farms who might consider some of their livestock as pets)
I don't think you are making a fair assessment there. You are contrasting "fish" with "cows" and "chickens" when they really should be compared to birds and mammals.
People don't generally eat their pet fish and they don't keep cod, salmon and tuna as pets. In western culture, people eat chickens and turkeys and keep pet parrots and cockatiels. People eat cows and sheep, and keep pet dogs and cats. How is that different from fish?
Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
Anyone else getting a craving for Rabbit? Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: I don't care if it really was suffering or not. That was utterly barbarous.
I'm curious, if the animal wasn't suffering and we could somehow be certain of that, why would you find it "utterly barbarous".
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Because the whole appeal is that it seems like it is.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
I dunno, maybe living fish tastes better than dead fish.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Because the whole appeal is that it seems like it is.
Agreed. I think that enjoying torturing something -- even if that something were a realistic simulation -- is barbaric.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
Rarely have I agreed with such a diverse cross-section of Hatrack before.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
That was maybe the most disturbing thing I've seen in a long time.
It's not just that it's awful to watch the fish suffer, whether it actually is or not, it appears to be, and that's close enough. But there's also the enjoyment of the guests. And there's the fact that some sick weirdo actually say down and thought up a process to cook a living creature to the point where it's consumable but not dead, and thought this would be a great seller.
The number of processes that had to be completed to bring about that video is shocking and disturbing.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Strider: Toronto. Although, the conversations moved on I've heard of the rabbit thing from European Canadians (oh and 'wabbit stew') and the snake thing from Asian Canadians although I suspected there would be a North America equivalent.
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: I'm curious, if the animal wasn't suffering and we could somehow be certain of that, why would you find it "utterly barbarous".
Restaurant at the End of the Universe style?
quote:Originally posted by Threads: They could just kill it and it wouldn't change the taste at all (at least it wouldn't change the taste of anything besides the head). The thing is, I like raw fish and the fish (besides the head) actually looks very tasty. I would never pay for something like that though unless the fish were actually killed quickly and as painlessly as possible.
If it was about taste, they wouldn't leave the head alive because usually in Chinese or some other Asian cuisines the head is actually considered to be a very good part to eat. This is actually kinda wasteful from a taste perspective.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:Our relationship with fish in this culture is interesting. I think it's the only animal that we both keep as pets and eat(not counting those who are raised on farms who might consider some of their livestock as pets)
People don't generally eat their pet fish and they don't keep cod, salmon and tuna as pets. In western culture, people eat chickens and turkeys and keep pet parrots and cockatiels. People eat cows and sheep, and keep pet dogs and cats. How is that different from fish?
I'm not exactly sure what you're asking me here Rabbit. Are you asking me why we don't eat dogs and cats in western culture?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
No, she's saying that "people eat fish and also have pet fish" is analogous to "people eat mammals (cows) and also have pet mammals (dogs)".
You're drawing the lines in different places. A goldfish has about as much in common with a sardine as a cow has with a dog.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:A goldfish has about as much in common with a sardine as a cow has with a dog.
I agree with that statement, but not in the way you meant it.
I think i'm actually being pretty consistent where I draw my own personal line. I DO think it's odd that we have arbitrarily defined which animals we have for pets and love and take to the vet and get really sad when we hear a news story about them being treated inhumanely, and which ones we eat and don't care what happens to. So I drew my line at don't eat any animals.
I thought the fish example was an interesting oddity worth pointing out, but you're right that there are many significant differences between pet fish and the fish we eat, and when looked at that way, the difference in the mammals we do or do not eat is just as worthy of bringing up.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
You know there's a book due out in January on that topic. I don't know enough about it to have an opinion, but the hardcore-vegan on my GR friends list plans to read it.
Edit: Ok, I just read enough of the Google Books preview to be sure I have no interest in reading it. I know enough people -- like Porter and his family -- who know what they eat to not buy her hypothesis. I don't think it's terribly original, either.
Edit #2: Amazon has updated the release date. Apparently it was released over the weekend.
[ November 18, 2009, 01:55 AM: Message edited by: rivka ]
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
I think you can make an argument that because of their different evolutionary histories dogs and cows now have significantly different conscious experiences. And that the greater personality of dogs indicates they are aware of their pain to a greater extent and would suffer more than cows under the same circumstances. I don't really buy that argument, but I can see arguments of that type being made to defend the eating of certain animals and not others. That kind of argument certainly stands on more footing when comparing something like salmon and dogs.
thanks for the link!
edit - okay, thanks for the demotion in status update. Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
We don't generally keep the same type of fish that we eat as pets.
edit: well that was pretty late, haha. Note to self: refresh before commenting.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
you're a page late Elmer's Glue. Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elmer's Glue: We don't generally keep the same type of fish that we eat as pets.
edit: well that was pretty late, haha. Note to self: refresh before commenting.
One day when I can afford a large enough tank, I'm going to keep a Bluefin Tuna for a pet, just to prove you wrong.
And I'm going to name it Elmer.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I DO think it's odd that we have arbitrarily defined which animals we have for pets and love and take to the vet and get really sad when we hear a news story about them being treated inhumanely, and which ones we eat and don't care what happens to.
Inasmuch as you're applying this "we" to everybody else (besides yourself) in this conversation, you are incorrect both about our attitude toward pets and livestock.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
mph, I've already commented on the fact that I think it's generally good what you are doing. I've heard from other people who own or grew up on farms that their attitude towards their animals is quite different from the norm. That they make close connections with the animals they raise and eventually eat. When I said "we" I did not specifically mean those conversing in this thread, but our society in general. Will you admit my statement is correct for the population of America in general? I can't preface every single one of my statements with a note excluding all those who are exceptions. No conversation would ever get anywhere.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:Originally posted by Elmer's Glue: We don't generally keep the same type of fish that we eat as pets.
edit: well that was pretty late, haha. Note to self: refresh before commenting.
One day when I can afford a large enough tank, I'm going to keep a Bluefin Tuna for a pet, just to prove you wrong.
And I'm going to name it Elmer.
Gonna eat it when it dies?
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: I don't know that I've heard of anyone eating snakes or rabbits in America.
I've seen rabbit in the supermarket, though I can't now remember which state. (I think Michigan, but I can't swear to that.)
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
That video was beyond horrific.
*shudder*
That said, I'm an unrepentant carnivore, but I do try to buy meat from small, local farms that have good farming practices. We always buy free range eggs, and we often buy free range meat - but not, I admit - and due to cost concerns, always.
I think I could butcher an animal if I had to. I do subscribe to the head-to-tail approach - I eat liver, brains, feet and offal. I'm working up to kidney and tripe. I figure if an animal died for me, I should at least eat all of it, and not be squeamish.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:I think i'm actually being pretty consistent where I draw my own personal line.
Now you are talking about a completely different line. The fish example you brought up is only an interesting oddity if you consider gold fish and pollack to be the same kinds of animals even though you don't think of cows and dogs as the same kind of animals. Its only an interesting oddity because you see a line that makes cows different from dogs but don't draw that line same line between different kinds of fish.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: I eat liver, brains, feet and offal. I'm working up to kidney and tripe.
If you can eat liver, you can eat kidney.
Brains is right out for me, though.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:When I said "we" I did not specifically mean those conversing in this thread, but our society in general.
Fair enough.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
I didn't think there'd be any reason to start a thread for horrible stuff on youtube, but lo and behold:
quote:Its only an interesting oddity because you see a line that makes cows different from dogs but don't draw that line same line between different kinds of fish.
you're right I made the mistake of lumping all fish together, I did the fish community a disservice by doing that. In that sense about the line I draw, you're correct. but:
quote:The fish example you brought up is only an interesting oddity if you consider gold fish and pollack to be the same kinds of animals even though you don't think of cows and dogs as the same kind of animal
see, I do draw that line across the board. I do think that cows and dogs are the same type of animal, but most people don't since they eat one and not the other. Obviously my view of the fish world isn't quite accurate so I can't speak for how the general population views fish. Do most people view their goldfish and all the other fish people keep in a fish tank as different in kind from the fish they eat for dinner? I have no idea. My assumption was that most people don't, hence I thought it was an interesting oddity.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elmer's Glue:
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:Originally posted by Elmer's Glue: We don't generally keep the same type of fish that we eat as pets.
edit: well that was pretty late, haha. Note to self: refresh before commenting.
One day when I can afford a large enough tank, I'm going to keep a Bluefin Tuna for a pet, just to prove you wrong.
And I'm going to name it Elmer.
Gonna eat it when it dies?
Yep.
Honestly if it was cute and cuddly I probably wouldn't. But it's harder I think to be emotionally attached to something you can rarely actually touch.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
You obviously never watched Pushing Daisies!
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
If you don't think that was harder, then you've never watched it yourself!
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Because the whole appeal is that it seems like it is.
Why do you presume that? I have heard that in Japan it is popular to eat a certain kind of fish where the muscle will continue to spasm for several minutes after the fish has been butchered. The appeal has nothing to do with "sufferering" of the fish. It has to do with the sensation of eating muscle tissue that is moving.
I agree that it would be barbarous to do something because you thought it was causing suffering even if in fact it did not. But that doesn't actually address my question. If we could be certain that this didn't cause the fish to suffer, then that would no longer be part of the appeal, would it? Would it still then be barbarous?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:If we could be certain that this didn't cause the fish to suffer, then that would no longer be part of the appeal, would it?
No. Even when we know it's not real, our brains still in many ways process simulated X a X.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Indeed. One could note that the outrage in the US about the Japanese simulated rape games and the Modern Warfare controversy about acting as a terrorist shooting civilians, means that at least some seem to follow this idea consistently.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
To some extent that's true, but only to some extent.
Do you think watching or making movies like "Kill Bill" or "Clock Work Orange" is barbarous? If so, is it equally barbarous to the Roman's watching real fights to the death in the arena? What about role playing games? Do you think its barbarous for children to play cops and robbers and pretend to shoot each other? I'm trying to get a sense of where you draw the line.
Posted by FoolishTook (Member # 5358) on :
I won't watch the video. I already know I can't handle it. I just got over having nightmares after watching a video of animals being skinned alive in China.
I can't even kill a spider without mourning the spider afterwards. I only kill them because I'm terrified of them. Even then, if I can simply move the spider elsewhere, I will. But if that requires picking up a quarter-sized wolf spider, I can't do it.
I'm not a vegetarian yet, but I've considered it. It's a personal thing with me. I don't want to cost people their jobs or their livelihood, so I'd never push this on anyone.
But I think it's our responsibility to treat animals humanely. By that, I mean like what Strider said about a farmer's relationship with the animals. It's the industrialized, robotic slaughter I can't stomach. I have no issue with farmers.
I need to look into the "free range" deal. I pretty much only eat poultry at this point, but if I can improve on that as well, I will.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Be prepared to pay a lot more for your food.
Industrial agriculture is a lot more efficient.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Yep, and non-industrial farmers slaughter animals and have them accidentally die (especially when young) in plenty of ways, too.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
The following is a trailer for a documentary film about what we as humans do to animals. The trailer alone was horrific, and one of the most difficult things I've watched in a long long time. The fish video that started this thread is nothing in comparison. Seriously. I'm giving fair warning. If you get queasy easily or are prone to strong visceral emotional reactions, DO NOT watch this video.
I don't think I can bring myself to ever watch this movie. Though I can imagine it would prompt me to a higher level of activism if I did.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
I have a brother in law that is from Tonga. For his daughter's first birthday party he purchased two pigs to eat. The pigs were still alive, and the pig farm had two options. You could butcher them yourself or have the pig farm do it for an extra $50.
My brother in law opted to do it himself, as he had done it many times in Tonga. I watched him and his two brothers do it, and it didn't bother me as much as I thought it would. They showed a lot of respect for the animal, even thanking the pig verbally it before killing it.
I have no issue with eating meat of any kind. I am one who believes it is there for that. What I have issue with is the inhumane way animals are often slaughtered.
Frying a fish and eating it all while the fish is still alive is grotesque and sick. I love lobster, but I could never cook one myself. I hear they scream when you put them in the boiling water.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)